Local Anesthesia With 1% Lidocaine Versus General Anesthesia for Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy at L5/S1 Disc Herniation: A Prospective Randomized Study.
Xin Wang, Junjie Shen, Zhiheng Chen, Bin Cai, Yuanyuan Chen, Guowang Zhang, Jianguang Xu, Xiaofeng Lian
{"title":"Local Anesthesia With 1% Lidocaine Versus General Anesthesia for Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy at L5/S1 Disc Herniation: A Prospective Randomized Study.","authors":"Xin Wang, Junjie Shen, Zhiheng Chen, Bin Cai, Yuanyuan Chen, Guowang Zhang, Jianguang Xu, Xiaofeng Lian","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>A prospective randomized clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this study, we compared local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine (LA) and general anesthesia (GA) utilized in PEID at L5/S1 disc herniation.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Given the anatomic characteristics of L5/S1 segment, interlaminar approach was preferred to perform endoscopic discectomy for L5/S1 disc herniation. Typically, general anesthesia was used for interlaminar approach. However, with general anesthesia, nerve damage during surgery due to being unable to monitor patient status is a main concerned for surgeons. As an alternative option, local anesthesia has been developed recently. But, the optimal type of anesthesia for PEID remains controversial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From March 2021 to March 2023, 103 consecutive patients with L5/S1 disc herniation who planned to undergo PEID in our unit were randomized to the LA group (n=53) or GA group (n=50). Both groups were followed up for at least 24 months. Surgical-related parameters, clinical outcomes, and complications were compared between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean operative time and bed rest time were shorter in the LA group than in the GA group (both P<0.001). The estimated blood loss in the LA group was greater than that in the GA group (P<0.001). The cost of hospitalization in the LA group was significantly lower than that in the GA group (P<0.001). At every time point of follow-up, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of VAS, ODI, and modified MacNab criteria. The satisfaction surveys showed that more patients in the LA group would choose contrary anesthesia, including 6 patients who were administered extravenously injected sufentanil intraoperatively due to intensive pain. Postoperative neuropathic abnormalities were rarer in the LA group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both local anesthesia using 1% lidocaine and general anesthesia are effective and safe for PEID at the L5/S1 segment. The use of local anesthesia is preferable due to its associated reductions in operative time, bed rest duration, and economic costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001743","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study design: A prospective randomized clinical trial.
Objective: In this study, we compared local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine (LA) and general anesthesia (GA) utilized in PEID at L5/S1 disc herniation.
Summary of background data: Given the anatomic characteristics of L5/S1 segment, interlaminar approach was preferred to perform endoscopic discectomy for L5/S1 disc herniation. Typically, general anesthesia was used for interlaminar approach. However, with general anesthesia, nerve damage during surgery due to being unable to monitor patient status is a main concerned for surgeons. As an alternative option, local anesthesia has been developed recently. But, the optimal type of anesthesia for PEID remains controversial.
Methods: From March 2021 to March 2023, 103 consecutive patients with L5/S1 disc herniation who planned to undergo PEID in our unit were randomized to the LA group (n=53) or GA group (n=50). Both groups were followed up for at least 24 months. Surgical-related parameters, clinical outcomes, and complications were compared between the 2 groups.
Results: The mean operative time and bed rest time were shorter in the LA group than in the GA group (both P<0.001). The estimated blood loss in the LA group was greater than that in the GA group (P<0.001). The cost of hospitalization in the LA group was significantly lower than that in the GA group (P<0.001). At every time point of follow-up, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of VAS, ODI, and modified MacNab criteria. The satisfaction surveys showed that more patients in the LA group would choose contrary anesthesia, including 6 patients who were administered extravenously injected sufentanil intraoperatively due to intensive pain. Postoperative neuropathic abnormalities were rarer in the LA group.
Conclusions: Both local anesthesia using 1% lidocaine and general anesthesia are effective and safe for PEID at the L5/S1 segment. The use of local anesthesia is preferable due to its associated reductions in operative time, bed rest duration, and economic costs.
期刊介绍：
Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure.
Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
